Even the most basic details of the January murder of a Harrison man are suppressed, hidden away in closed court files in the magistrate’s office at 80th District Court in Harrison, which serves Clare and Gladwin counties.

We have pursued those records for three months.

This past week we learned that a public court record we have sought remains hidden, both unethically and illegally, because of an apparent cozy relationship between the sitting prosecutor and the magistrate, herself a former assistant prosecutor.

This much we know.

Floyd Dennis, a 68-year-old longtime employee of the Harrison School District who was serving on the school board, is dead.

Advertisement

Oanh K. Bass, a 32-year-old woman who moved here from California two years ago and had worked a job as a manicurist for two months, is accused of killing him, perhaps in a house that neither of them owned or lived in.

One can only speculate the reason Prosecutor Michelle Ambrozaitis and Magistrate Karen Willing, who also serves as the court administrator, have ignored the state constitution, common law and the Michigan Court Rules by which all courts must abide.

Maybe they’re hiding details to protect the integrity and memory of a beloved dead man who sources whisper was having a relationship of some sorts with a woman less than half his age who killed him.

Actually, I hope that’s it – but we’re also fighting another case where Willing has mysteriously closed the affidavit and hidden it from public view.

If their conspiratorial secrecy runs deep, then so, too, must the suspicion that, in Clare County District Court, the prosecutor is not a litigant on level legal ground with the defense, but does, in fact, hold preferential standing.

Some courtroom basics:

Courts and the records they keep are the most public of public records. They are not subject to the Michigan Freedom of Information Act because they are more open than that. They are open under common law and under the Michigan Constitution, and always have been.

If the court holds a record, it is a public record – and the bar to make those records secret is the highest in our government – much higher than those made public by legislative action.

On the day after Bass was arrested, we asked for the affidavit used to obtain the arrest warrant. Those affidavits, filed by the lead investigating officer, detail why law enforcement believes a crime was committed and that the named person is the one who did it.

Already, Magistrate Willing – at the request of Prosecutor Ambrozaitis – had sealed the document from public inspection.

Worse, as we began asking questions of court staff, up to and including newly-elected Judge Joshua M. Farrell, we were told it was sealed for 56 days as allowed under law.

We searched and searched, and I had two attorney friends search as well. No such state law or court rule exists. Affidavits used to obtain search warrants are covered under a 56-day closure option, but not those for arrest warrants.

Still, court staff and even the judge kept referring to the non-existent 56-day rule, saying they’d always done it that way.

This past week I decided to dedicate time to getting that affidavit.

In our society, public officials must talk, police must release details, prosecutors must fill in the blanks.

Floyd Dennis was still dead.

All we had were blanks; unanswered questions.

In trying by email to make Judge Farrell, who practiced law 13 years before being elected judge, understand that standards had not been met and procedures not followed, he referred me to Sheriff John Wilson and Prosecutor Ambrozaitis.

Sheriff Wilson, for the record, says he’d gladly release details, including the actual police report that we’ve requested – which is completed and subject to FOIA once it goes to the prosecutor and warrants are issued. But he’s been told by Ambrozaitis to say or release nothing.

Clearly, Wilson is not the problem here, but for a judge to suggest I follow up with the sheriff and prosecutor about a problem with his court is ridiculous.

What we’re after is a court record that has been illegally sealed by the court, and, should we litigate, the court is the defendant, not the sheriff or the prosecutor.

To close a court record in Michigan is very difficult and is to occur only as a last resort.

Under Michigan Court Rules, the process begins with a written motion from a petitioning party, in this case that would be Prosecutor Ambrozaitis.

Next, the judge must consider the specific interest to be protected and find good cause that the record must be sealed – but not before examining every less-restrictive option, weighing the interests of all involved, including the public, and giving all interested parties the opportunity to be heard.

After that, a ruling to seal a court document must be made on the record and, preferably, in writing.

Thursday, I went to 80th District Court in Harrison and asked for the written motion and court order.

Magistrate Willing was not in, and I was told those would be under “lock-and-key” in her office.

That, in and of itself, was troubling. Court records are open when the court is open, not just when the turnkey is present to turn the key.

Friday morning I was back again.

Magistrate Willing was angry – first accusing me of coming to her court demanding records and being rude to her staff.

I confess that if politely asking as an unidentified member of the public, verbally and in writing, to see a public file is being demanding, I am guilty.

As to whether asking if the magistrate is full-time or part-time was rude, I disagree.

Again, court records are open when the court is open. How often the holder of those records works is an honest question, and a public concern if some records are only open when special employees are working.

But the tongue-lashing wasn’t the worst of it.

Magistrate Willing said there never was a written motion seeking to seal the affidavit against Bass, that the specific interest to be protected was never put in writing, that there is no written opinion on the reason for sealing it and that there was no ruling made on the official court record to seal it.

In other words, she just did it.

Further, she said no notice of the sealed record was sent to the Michigan Supreme Court or the Michigan Court Administrative Office, both of which are required to be notified when a court record is sealed under Michigan Court Rules.

I pleaded with her to hear my points, to read the Michigan Court Rules, which I had in my hand.

She refused and retreated to her office.

I asked to see the judge, and was told he would not see visitors.

Finally, I identified myself, provided a business card, and asked for him to call me.

Seven hours later, he has yet to call.

Thinking further, I realized that absent a motion seeking closure from the prosecutor, and absent a court-order to close the record, it was actually not really a closed record.

I summarized that quirk to court staff, pointing out that this affidavit had truly not been legally sealed, and thus it was an open record, and asked again to see it.

They checked.

Magistrate Willing was not willing to let me see it, telling them one more time to insist that the record, which no one officially ever asked to be closed, and which she never took steps to close, was, in fact, a closed record.

It’s bad enough trying to cover a court like that for a newspaper.

Imagine the challenge of defending yourself in court, or opposing the prosecutor as a defense attorney, against a system that runs willy-nilly with ethical demands and court rules in the interest of prosecutorial coziness.